Sequels Who should be the villain in an Avengers sequel? (Poll)

[spideymouse]

It depends on whether or not the Infinity Gauntlet already exists in the MCU. Technically, it does, since it was already seen in Odin's Treasury in a deleted scene from the Thor movie, and was featured in the artbook for that movie. Some people don't want to believe that because they believe that deleted scenes are not "canon." It remains to be seen how Marvel Studios feels about deleted scenes.

Actually, it wasn't in a deleted scene--it was in the actual movie:

Spoiler

 

[Chewy]

I only agree that Marvel won't deconstruct their lead character, because that's not what Whedon's about. But Stark Ultron would naturally be a deconstruction of Stark, not a weightless goon.

Stark doesn't have the same neuroses Pym does, nor the same positioning on the superhero social ladder. He's the big man on campus, very good friend to the other Avengers, and generally speaking he's not insecure about his status as a big celebrity - he's been a billionaire his whole life.

So yeah, you can tell a story about Stark feeling bad that he created this thing that became a villain, and maybe the other Avengers yell at him a little bit. But he'll come out the other side just fine, he'll patch up those friendships before the credits roll. That's the Stark they've established, and the one audiences like. He doesn't have the personality traits needed to be deconstructed the way Pym does, and he's not as expendable to the studio as a fifth-man-on-the-totem-pole Pym would be. You can't tell the story about this mistake destroying a very destroyable man, which is really what the Ultron story is, and the only reason to tell it.

If Marvel doesn't set up Pym, fine. Make a Kang movie or a Masters of Evil movie or even a Korvac movie. But I'm not really sure what the point of telling a far less interesting Ultron story is, just because it's doable.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

I knew I kept you guys around for a reason.

 

[I'm Venom]

A Stark-invents-Ultron-and-then-Ultron-turns-against-him story would be easy to do if they aren't going the Pym route.

 

[Chewy]

Right, no one said it would be hard. That's not the point, and not the conversation we're having.

 

[jaqua99]

Stark doesn't have the same neuroses Pym does, nor the same positioning on the superhero social ladder. He's the big man on campus, very good friend to the other Avengers, and generally speaking he's not insecure about his status as a big celebrity - he's been a billionaire his whole life.

So yeah, you can tell a story about Stark feeling bad that he created this thing that became a villain, and maybe the other Avengers yell at him a little bit. But he'll come out the other side just fine, he'll patch up those friendships before the credits roll. That's the Stark they've established, and the one audiences like. He doesn't have the personality traits needed to be deconstructed the way Pym does, and he's not as expendable to the studio as a fifth-man-on-the-totem-pole Pym would be. You can't tell the story about this mistake destroying a very destroyable man, which is really what the Ultron story is, and the only reason to tell it.

If Marvel doesn't set up Pym, fine. Make a Kang movie or a Masters of Evil movie or even a Korvac movie. But I'm not really sure what the point of telling a far less interesting Ultron story is, just because it's doable.

nail on the head. that's it

 

[spideymouse]

Stark doesn't have the same neuroses Pym does, nor the same positioning on the superhero social ladder. He's the big man on campus, very good friend to the other Avengers, and generally speaking he's not insecure about his status as a big celebrity - he's been a billionaire his whole life.

So yeah, you can tell a story about Stark feeling bad that he created this thing that became a villain, and maybe the other Avengers yell at him a little bit. But he'll come out the other side just fine, he'll patch up those friendships before the credits roll. That's the Stark they've established, and the one audiences like. He doesn't have the personality traits needed to be deconstructed the way Pym does, and he's not as expendable to the studio as a fifth-man-on-the-totem-pole Pym would be. You can't tell the story about this mistake destroying a very destroyable man, which is really what the Ultron story is, and the only reason to tell it.

If Marvel doesn't set up Pym, fine. Make a Kang movie or a Masters of Evil movie or even a Korvac movie. But I'm not really sure what the point of telling a far less interesting Ultron story is, just because it's doable.

nail on the head. that's it

Agreed. I've made the point in this same type of discussion before that we've already seen the "Stark's tech being used against him" plot two times already (hopefully, IM3 will show us something new with Extremis and Mandarin in the mix). We've already seen Stark struggle with the guilt and responsibility of lives destroyed by his inventions, and we've already seen him conquer that demon.

To have Ultron be created by Stark could widen the scope of that same theme in terms of its worldwide effect, but the problem lies in that it would still be the same theme--it would not show us anything new about Stark or bring the character anywhere different from where he's been before. It would absolutely be more interesting to see Stark (and Cap and Thor and Banner) interacting with a much different man dealing with that struggle in a much different way.

 

[DrCosmic]

Stark doesn't have the same neuroses Pym does, nor the same positioning on the superhero social ladder. He's the big man on campus, very good friend to the other Avengers, and generally speaking he's not insecure about his status as a big celebrity - he's been a billionaire his whole life.

So yeah, you can tell a story about Stark feeling bad that he created this thing that became a villain, and maybe the other Avengers yell at him a little bit. But he'll come out the other side just fine, he'll patch up those friendships before the credits roll. That's the Stark they've established, and the one audiences like. He doesn't have the personality traits needed to be deconstructed the way Pym does, and he's not as expendable to the studio as a fifth-man-on-the-totem-pole Pym would be. You can't tell the story about this mistake destroying a very destroyable man, which is really what the Ultron story is, and the only reason to tell it.

If Marvel doesn't set up Pym, fine. Make a Kang movie or a Masters of Evil movie or even a Korvac movie. But I'm not really sure what the point of telling a far less interesting Ultron story is, just because it's doable.

Hmmm... when I look at Civil War Tony Stark and Ultron I see very similar characters, as far as function. There is definitely something really bad there to deconstruct. That's a full interesting story, as far as I can tell. And I've never seen Pym destroyed, except in Ultimates, where he didn't even need Ultron to destroy himself, and that makes sense, because as a rule, an episodic series doesn't character assassinate a beloved character. Those are the letters that won't go away. So characters always find redemption, as Pym has. If the Ultron story is what you say, that could be mind blowing, and very bold , but I'm not sure that it is that.

Why not? Protosevich's script of Thor was set entirely in medieval times, and featured a ton of characters who didn't show up in the actual film. And I'm sure there's umpteen other scripts that completely threw out the first pitch.

(And speaking of throwing out first pitches, Happy Opening Day, MLB. )

Lol, that's true, I guess those statements after each of the early drafts saying it's not about connecting it to the MCU just don't lead me in that direction... as always, we'll see...

 

[Chewy]

Hmmm... when I look at Civil War Tony Stark and Ultron I see very similar characters, as far as function. There is definitely something really bad there to deconstruct. That's a full interesting story, as far as I can tell. And I've never seen Pym destroyed, except in Ultimates, where he didn't even need Ultron to destroy himself, and that makes sense, because as a rule, an episodic series doesn't character assassinate a beloved character. Those are the letters that won't go away. So characters always find redemption, as Pym has. If the Ultron story is what you say, that could be mind blowing, and very bold , but I'm not sure that it is that.

Yeah but Movie Tony Stark is not Civil War Tony Stark, and turning him into that is a good way to kill his popularity. Those are the kind of extremes that they'll want to avoid with their leads.

Pym's implosion was a slow build in the comics, and it happened over the course of many Ultron appearances over many years. You're right that there was no specific "Ultron goes bad and suddenly Pym's life goes to hell" story, but that was what the stories built to, along with his gradually decomposing mental state. And I assume a film would adapt the same structure, while obviously condensing it. It's right up Whedon's wheelhouse - think Wesley in Angel. And yes, Pym ultimately finds redemption, but it takes a while, which it wouldn't for Stark.

 

[Chris B]

I could be wrong in hindsight of course, but 'they did rewrites so they threw out the initial pitch' doesn't strike any logical chords with me.

I agree with this. Plus, I still kind of got the impression from the Marvel panel at Comic Con last year that Wright wanted to use Lang.

Personally, what I could see happening is Marvel persuading Wright to drop the "Pym was Ant-Man in the 60's" angle and moving his story up to the present day. Allowing them to still use him in any Avengers sequels while Wright does his adaption of "To Steal Ant-Man" in the solo film with Lang.

 

[I'm Venom]

Right, no one said it would be hard. That's not the point, and not the conversation we're having.

Are you just trying to argue because we disagree on why to have Ultron be created by Stark is or isn't a good idea? I just pointed out that doing so would be easy if they aren't going to use Pym. It's not like I changed the subject completely or started talking about something that's unrelated.

 

[cherokeesam]

Actually, it wasn't in a deleted scene--it was in the actual movie:

Spoiler

Well, there you go.
It's no longer even a question, then: the IG already exists in the MCU, and is currently housed in Odin's Treasury. So the "gathering of the Gems" saga is already off the table.

 

[Ant-manic]

I agree with this. Plus, I still kind of got the impression from the Marvel panel at Comic Con last year that Wright wanted to use Lang.

Personally, what I could see happening is Marvel persuading Wright to drop the "Pym was Ant-Man in the 60's" angle and moving his story up to the present day. Allowing them to still use him in any Avengers sequels while Wright does his adaption of "To Steal Ant-Man" in the solo film with Lang.

that would be the best outcome if Wright intends to keep Lang in the movie. let him tell the story he wants to tell. but also introduce Pym (a viable version age-wise) in case Marvel wants to use him elsewhere.

 

[Ant-manic]

You said so yourself: it'd be just like Batman. ZOMG NERDRAGE COPYCAT yadda yadda yadda. Stark keeping secret files on his teammates is redundant in the MCU because (a) Nick Fury already has that avenue of paranoia well-covered; and (b) unlike Batman, Iron Man doesn't *need* to know the achilles heels of his comrades to take them out ---- he can (and does) just build a suit specially designed for that use (i.e., Hulkbuster, Thorbuster).

And the Avengers don't need to start getting paranoid about each other. They're "superfriends" now. From what I can see of IM3 so far, the paranoia Tony is experiencing is directed at the *bad guys* of this universe, not the *good guys.* He trusts Hulk and Thor (maybe more than he should). His personality might clash with Cap, but he has no real reason to hate, fear, or mistrust him --- he's freakin' Saint Steve Rogers. And fear or mistrust the SHIELD "help," like Tasha or Clint or Fury or Hill...? Not even worthy of his consideration.

We're still a long, long way from any kind of "Civil War" in the MCU. No need to start planting those seeds yet. If ever.



....And what was that all about....? Janet Van Dyne. i.e., Oedipus issues. That whole schtick wouldn't have worked at all without Janet and Hank playing Mommy and Daddy to their unruly "child."

what was that about? i totally didn't get that story. Ultron's motives were not explained. it didn't really look that much like Jan. and Pym did not even appear in the story. Ultron just played killer robot in that story.

 

[Blake II]

Avengers 1: Loki invades earth with his army of alien troops

Avengers 2: Thanos comes to earth to finish what loki couldn't do and ends up killing a couple avengers and destroying a good amount of earth before being killed.

Avengers 3: The superhero civil war takes place to end it all.

 

[fixxxer]

Well, there you go.
It's no longer even a question, then: the IG already exists in the MCU, and is currently housed in Odin's Treasury. So the "gathering of the Gems" saga is already off the table.

Not necessarily. If Marvel chooses to go the 'Assembling of the IG' route for the major theme of GoTG, Odin's Vault could be said to house only the gauntlet, minus the gems. Or possibly, a couple of, but not all the gems.

I proposed an outline for GoTG in another thread in the GoTG section, that I thought would make for a nice little storyline:

----------------------------------------------------------

On Thanos’ Backstory
Big. Purple. Scarier-than-Hell. Completely insane. Obsessed with Death. Carry on.

Star-Lord’s Origin
Take Star Lord’s origin from the GOTG 0.1 Marvel Now comic. Though we don’t need to delve into his ‘birth’ origin till later in the movie. As Mr. Dent mentioned, a version of the Marvel Preview #4 backstory could be tweaked enough to fit the movie.

Drax / Gamora
I like the idea of not making Drax human. In fact, I love the idea of Drax and Gamora being of the same species. Too many of Marvel’s cosmic folks have (somewhat) redundant Earth-bound origins. Also, explains their peculiar shade of green.

I wouldn’t, however, make them father and daughter though since that could possibly diminish a possible Moondragon storyline. I’m also not sure how a dad/daughter dynamic would play out on the team... Drax’s to-do list: (a) Kill Thanos (b) Tell idiot daughter to put some clothes on!

Plot Overview
I would actually make the plot akin to the IG series, where Thanos is going around the galaxy collecting the Infinity Gems, but in this version, it’s the Guardians running around attempting to stop him from completing the gauntlet.

Act I – Quill on Earth / Star Lord in the Galaxy
Covered above.

Act II – Destruction of Gamora’s and Drax’s Homeworld (about 15 years in the past)
It’s pretty much an idyllic day on Zen-Whoberi (had to look that one up ) when Thanos attacks and rains fire and brimstone on the planet and utterly destroys it, along with Drax and his family. Thanos also adopts a young Zen-Whoberian (Gamora) as a lark.

Now, the reason behind Thanos’ attack is that a cosmic entity (pick anyone from Marvel’s ledger) holds one of the Infinity Gems and is hiding out on the planet disguised as a common Zen-Whoberian. Said cosmic entity, with his/her dying breath, resurrects Drax granting him terrible power and singular purpose.

Act III – GoTG!
Drax, Gamora, Star Lord, Rocket Raccoon and Sapling Groot somehow meet up and come to the conclusion that Thanos must be stopped… admittedly I haven’t fleshed this part out fully.

Due to some misunderstanding (possibly a ruse perpetrated by Thanos) the Guardians are thought to be criminals and are pursued by the Nova Corps. So the Guardians are being chased across the galaxy, pursued by the Corps, while in parallel trying to thwart Thanos’ gem-stealing shenanigans.

Act IV – Showdown
Nova and co. finally figure out that Thanos is actually the villain and team up with the Guardians to take down Thanos. Thanos deploys his minions to battle the Nova Corps while he tackles the GoTG himself. Hey, the movie's title is GoTG, not Nova and the GoTG.

Epic battle ensues.

Act V - Consclusion
Drax comes close to killing Thanos, but not quite. The IG is assembled. Star Lord merely says, “we failed” and sends out a signal to Earth since they somehow come to know that Earth is central to Thanos’ subsequent plans. It now becomes clear that the GoTG plot was running alongside the events of IM3, and that this was the signal that Stark received at the end of IM3.

 

[cherokeesam]

Let's put the IM3 "deep space S.O.S." rumor on hold for now. So far, the "Gemini" armor (actual name for it) seems to be used only for the climactic "Iron Legion" battle in IM3, and the recent official write-up on the Gemini armor shows it as an orbital space suit, not a deep space one. (Not to mention there's the "little" problem of FTL travel that hasn't been invented yet in the MCU to occasion a true deep space armor.) Until someone can actually confirm there's a GOTG tie-in at the end of IM3, I'm sending that particular rumor to the "shenanigans" backburner.

Also, regarding the Gauntlet: people have theorized that the one in Odin's treasury doesn't have the actual gems, or might be missing one or two. The actual screenshot says otherwise, of course --- they're all there, glowing nice and magically and all that --- plus, it makes no sense for Odin to put a powerless Gauntlet on display. The Cask was definitely fully powered, so it's perfectly reasonable to assume that everything else in Odin's toy box works as advertised, too.

And my counter-theory for Thanos and the IG in the MCU: Thanos has been after the Gauntlet in Odin's Treasury all along. He merely manipulated Loki (Loki didn't realize it at the time) into a failed battle for Earth, which resulted in the Cube being returned to Asgard. With the Cube in Asgard, Thanos now has the "in" to Odin's Treasury that he was after all along....i.e., he used the attack on Earth as just a ruse. He wanted Loki to lose, so that the Cube would be returned to Asgard to open up that cosmic avenue into the Treasury.

 

[DrCosmic]

Yeah but Movie Tony Stark is not Civil War Tony Stark, and turning him into that is a good way to kill his popularity. Those are the kind of extremes that they'll want to avoid with their leads.

Pym's implosion was a slow build in the comics, and it happened over the course of many Ultron appearances over many years. You're right that there was no specific "Ultron goes bad and suddenly Pym's life goes to hell" story, but that was what the stories built to, along with his gradually decomposing mental state. And I assume a film would adapt the same structure, while obviously condensing it. It's right up Whedon's wheelhouse - think Wesley in Angel. And yes, Pym ultimately finds redemption, but it takes a while, which it wouldn't for Stark.

I mean, if the fall is condensed, why wouldn't the redemption? I see where you're coming from, and if Wright focuses Pym AND doesn't making a sequel, it works, otherwise, the fall has no power and too much setup and ruins Pyms solo franchise by making him, essentially, a villain. And that's kinda the point of Stark!Ultron that you would explore Civil War Tony in Ultron, and the dark of Tony would be explored without Tony actually doing anything wrong. It'd be like a cleaner Tower of Babel thing... the more I think about it, the more it sounds like something they would do to me. It makes Tony look more awesome, but still guiltless.

 

[I'm Venom]

I mean, if the fall is condensed, why wouldn't the redemption? I see where you're coming from, and if Wright focuses Pym AND doesn't making a sequel, it works, otherwise, the fall has no power and too much setup and ruins Pyms solo franchise by making him, essentially, a villain. And that's kinda the point of Stark!Ultron that you would explore Civil War Tony in Ultron, and the dark of Tony would be explored without Tony actually doing anything wrong. It'd be like a cleaner Tower of Babel thing... the more I think about it, the more it sounds like something they would do to me. It makes Tony look more awesome, but still guiltless.

As for Avengers 3, I'd love to see that.

 

[Chewy]

Does this helmet remind you of something?

A certain robot's head, perhaps?

 

[spideymouse]

Does this helmet remind you of something?

A certain robot's head, perhaps?

Looks like Tony Stark's Iron Man suit. Don't forget, Tony Stark HAS to create Ultron, remember?

 

[fixxxer]

Let's put the IM3 "deep space S.O.S." rumor on hold for now. So far, the "Gemini" armor (actual name for it) seems to be used only for the climactic "Iron Legion" battle in IM3, and the recent official write-up on the Gemini armor shows it as an orbital space suit, not a deep space one. (Not to mention there's the "little" problem of FTL travel that hasn't been invented yet in the MCU to occasion a true deep space armor.) Until someone can actually confirm there's a GOTG tie-in at the end of IM3, I'm sending that particular rumor to the "shenanigans" backburner.

Oh, agreed. At this point I'm taking all spoilers with a rather large dash of salt. That was just me spitballing with some semi-fanfic based on a hypothetical rumor. 'Twas all in fun.

Also, regarding the Gauntlet: people have theorized that the one in Odin's treasury doesn't have the actual gems, or might be missing one or two. The actual screenshot says otherwise, of course --- they're all there, glowing nice and magically and all that --- plus, it makes no sense for Odin to put a powerless Gauntlet on display. The Cask was definitely fully powered, so it's perfectly reasonable to assume that everything else in Odin's toy box works as advertised, too.

Again, agreed... kinda. They 'could' say that the gauntlet was not assembled in Odin's Vault, but the gems in them are not the 'real' infinity gems. Again, it would be complicating the issue a bit, but still, I just thought that a reverse heist movie would work in the context of GoTG. Instead of the team trying to pull off heists, the team would be attempting to stop the heist(s) being pulled off.

And my counter-theory for Thanos and the IG in the MCU: Thanos has been after the Gauntlet in Odin's Treasury all along. He merely manipulated Loki (Loki didn't realize it at the time) into a failed battle for Earth, which resulted in the Cube being returned to Asgard. With the Cube in Asgard, Thanos now has the "in" to Odin's Treasury that he was after all along....i.e., he used the attack on Earth as just a ruse. He wanted Loki to lose, so that the Cube would be returned to Asgard to open up that cosmic avenue into the Treasury.

Yes, I believe this is the current Averngers-based theory du jour among us MCU obsessives. I will not be disappointed at all if they went this route.

 

[DrCosmic]

Does this helmet remind you of something?

A certain robot's head, perhaps?

Very good find. Very good find. We shall see then.

 

[Rock Sexton]

And my counter-theory for Thanos and the IG in the MCU: Thanos has been after the Gauntlet in Odin's Treasury all along. He merely manipulated Loki (Loki didn't realize it at the time) into a failed battle for Earth, which resulted in the Cube being returned to Asgard. With the Cube in Asgard, Thanos now has the "in" to Odin's Treasury that he was after all along....i.e., he used the attack on Earth as just a ruse. He wanted Loki to lose, so that the Cube would be returned to Asgard to open up that cosmic avenue into the Treasury.

It's either that or Loki uses the Gauntlet as a means to bargain for his life.

 

[BatsDC]

Ideally I'd like Ultron to be the main villain assembling some sort of Masters of Evil to keep the Avengers busy, whilst still alluding to Thanos in the background. Then have Thanos be the big bad in A3.